Chief Justice Anwar Usman opening the judicial review hearing of Law No. 14 of 2002 on Tax Court, Tuesday (21/7) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held the fourth judicial review hearing of Law No. 14 of 2002 on Tax Court on Tuesday, July 21, 2020. The case No. 10/PUU-XVIII/2020 was filed by tax court judges Triyono Martanto, Haposan Lumban Gaol, and Redno Sri Rezeki, who argued that Article 5 paragraph (2) and Article 8 paragraph (2) of the Tax Court Law contradict Article 24 paragraph (1) and Article 25 of the 1945 Constitution. The hearing was scheduled to hear the statement of the House (DPR), who was absent.

"The House is not present. Today’s hearing is the final one so the Petitioners, the presidential’s attorney, and all parties are to submit their conclusions or additional statement no later than Wednesday, July 29, 2020," said Chief Justice Anwar Usman.

Also read:Pemerintah: Mekanisme Pencalonan Pimpinan Pengadilan Pajak Konstitusional

In the preliminary hearing on Wednesday, February 12, 2020, the Petitioners had revealed their grievance due to the enactment of Article 8 paragraph (2) of the Tax Court Law regarding the appointment and dismissal of chairperson and vice chairperson of the tax court who are nominated by the Minister of Finance. The issue is related to their independence and authority to examine, hear, and decide on tax disputes. Furthermore, the Petitioners believe that the a quo law doesn’t clearly and firmly stipulate the mechanism for determining the candidates for the chairperson and vice chairperson of the tax court.

They also said that since the establishment of the tax court in 2002, there had been several mechanisms for nominating candidates for chairperson and vice chairperson. First, by selecting judges to be subsequently proposed to the Minister of Finance. Second, based on a recommendation by the chairperson of the previous period before their retirement. The inconsistency occurs because there is no clear mechanism for the selection of chairperson and vice chairperson of the tax court, which is only located in the capital.

As a consequence, according to the Petitioners, the chairperson and vice chairperson of the tax court will hold the office until retirement because they cannot be dismissed unless they commit a crime, violate code of ethics, resign, are physically or mentally ill, are unable to carry out their duties, or pass away. The absence of restrictions on the tenure potentially leads to authoritarianism, abuse of power, and stagnation in leadership regeneration. Therefore, in their petitum, the Petitioners request that the Constitutional Court declare the a quo provision unconstitutional and not legally binding. 

Writer: Sri Pujianti
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari
PR: Annisa Lestari
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 7/21/2020 16:56 WIB

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case where any differences occur between the English and the Indonesian version, the Indonesian version will prevail.